Just my opinion but I think a player like Mack should have already been extended. He has played every game so far. I can see waiting on T.J. Ward because of his injury history._________________browns and indian fan 7272

Well, he was present for the Peyton Hillis fiasco, so he knows firsthand what kind of distraction it can be.

But after seeing what kind of emphasis this front office puts on the interior offensive line, I won't be the least bit shocked to see him walk next spring.

I think Mack is a very good center and should be resigned. I think it will be a valid criticism of the FO if we lose him because we did not make him a good enough offer.

That being said, if he chooses to not even negotiate OR if he ultimately chooses to accept another offer from a different team that is comparable to ours-- THAT will be more on him not wanting to be here.

As far as your opinion about 'emphasis':

1. Resources are limited with finances, available options, and options with a desire to play here (on a transitioning team)

2. The FO chose to place the highest initial priority on the defensive front 7--and you will need to demonstrate why that was a mistake before having a valid criticism that it SHOULD have been the interior OL

3. We had Pinkston, Lauvao, Greco, and Gilkey competing for 2 starting spots most of the offseason. Most fans think Greco is 'good enough'--so there were really 3 guys competing for ONE spot. How many MORE guys (and which ones, and at what cost) should they have brought in?

4. Weren't you one of the people criticizing the Browns for having so many OL on the final 53? How can you ALSO criticize them for lacking emphasis?

5. There is a rather long list of filled holes this offseason--yet some look at the cap space and feel there should have been more holes filled. I assert that using cap space to 'fill holes' is foolish and potentially destructive and instead cap space should be used to secure established good players THAT WANT TO BE HERE_________________

Well, he was present for the Peyton Hillis fiasco, so he knows firsthand what kind of distraction it can be.

But after seeing what kind of emphasis this front office puts on the interior offensive line, I won't be the least bit shocked to see him walk next spring.

I think Mack is a very good center and should be resigned. I think it will be a valid criticism of the FO if we lose him because we did not make him a good enough offer.

That being said, if he chooses to not even negotiate OR if he ultimately chooses to accept another offer from a different team that is comparable to ours-- THAT will be more on him not wanting to be here.

As far as your opinion about 'emphasis':

1. Resources are limited with finances, available options, and options with a desire to play here (on a transitioning team)

2. The FO chose to place the highest initial priority on the defensive front 7--and you will need to demonstrate why that was a mistake before having a valid criticism that it SHOULD have been the interior OL

3. We had Pinkston, Lauvao, Greco, and Gilkey competing for 2 starting spots most of the offseason. Most fans think Greco is 'good enough'--so there were really 3 guys competing for ONE spot. How many MORE guys (and which ones, and at what cost) should they have brought in?

4. Weren't you one of the people criticizing the Browns for having so many OL on the final 53? How can you ALSO criticize them for lacking emphasis?

5. There is a rather long list of filled holes this offseason--yet some look at the cap space and feel there should have been more holes filled. I assert that using cap space to 'fill holes' is foolish and potentially destructive and instead cap space should be used to secure established good players THAT WANT TO BE HERE

This could go either way, I hope it's just that he really doesn't want to be a distraction and wants to be here long term- if we can show improvement I don't see him leaving - and if he wants to leave... Franchise tag???_________________
R.I.P Crackburn, always in our hearts
adopt a Brown: Davone Bess - The best- one catch, one first down--- never mind person foul takes away! arrghhh Reg on the SIG

Well, he was present for the Peyton Hillis fiasco, so he knows firsthand what kind of distraction it can be.

But after seeing what kind of emphasis this front office puts on the interior offensive line, I won't be the least bit shocked to see him walk next spring.

I think Mack is a very good center and should be resigned. I think it will be a valid criticism of the FO if we lose him because we did not make him a good enough offer.

That being said, if he chooses to not even negotiate OR if he ultimately chooses to accept another offer from a different team that is comparable to ours-- THAT will be more on him not wanting to be here.

As far as your opinion about 'emphasis':

1. Resources are limited with finances, available options, and options with a desire to play here (on a transitioning team)

2. The FO chose to place the highest initial priority on the defensive front 7--and you will need to demonstrate why that was a mistake before having a valid criticism that it SHOULD have been the interior OL

3. We had Pinkston, Lauvao, Greco, and Gilkey competing for 2 starting spots most of the offseason. Most fans think Greco is 'good enough'--so there were really 3 guys competing for ONE spot. How many MORE guys (and which ones, and at what cost) should they have brought in?

4. Weren't you one of the people criticizing the Browns for having so many OL on the final 53? How can you ALSO criticize them for lacking emphasis?

5. There is a rather long list of filled holes this offseason--yet some look at the cap space and feel there should have been more holes filled. I assert that using cap space to 'fill holes' is foolish and potentially destructive and instead cap space should be used to secure established good players THAT WANT TO BE HERE

Save your questions for someone else.

The bolded are not questions--they were just things you seemed to have ignored just now.

I get it that you don't like to answer questions, you just like to make statements.

Of course, you also don't comment on the statements I made either--so that's a little confusing.

Also, you responded to say you're not going to respond--also confusing.

Oh, and you also ask a lot of questions. Don't know why you have such a problem with it. Also confusing._________________

No offense, I'd just rather remove my fingertips with a broken bottle than type out a response to any question or opinion of yours.

Back to football, my contention is that Mack will more than likely not be here next year because this front office just doesn't care about the interior of the offensive line. If they did, Mack would already have been extended and we would added more than a 7th rounder from a D3 school (as much as I like Gilkey, that's all he is at this point)._________________

No offense, I'd just rather remove my fingertips with a broken bottle than type out a response to any question or opinion of yours.

Back to football, my contention is that Mack will more than likely not be here next year because this front office just doesn't care about the interior of the offensive line. If they did, Mack would already have been extended and we would added more than a 7th rounder from a D3 school (as much as I like Gilkey, that's all he is at this point).

I think its idiotic to think the FO is going to let a centor like Mack walk because they didnt address the guard position. To me that coming off a little dramatic.

I didnt know we had to address every single position in one single offseason.

Everyone complains about the guard position now that we are down to our 3rd string guard. It doesnt matter who the Browns would of signing. Just because you bring in a FA meams they wont get hurt. In the preseason Lauvo was looking fine as the RG.